commented out seemingly unneeded code (04f45016) · Commits · Elphel / ezynq

ezynq_uboot.py

+6 −5

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -640,7 +640,7 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
		\tint * d= (int *) 0x4000000;
		\twhile (s< ((int )0x30000)) d++=*s++;
		'''
		self.cfile+='\tddrc_wait_queue_empty(); /* Wait no commands are pending in DDRC queue */\n'
		# self.cfile+='\tddrc_wait_queue_empty(); /* Wait no commands are pending in DDRC queue */\n'

		self._cp_led('LED_CHECKPOINT_8') # Before relocation to DDR (to 0x4000000+ )

		@@ -667,7 +667,7 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
		"mov r0,r0" );
		'''
		# seems some delay is needed before remapping DDR memory
		self.cfile+='\tddrc_wait_queue_empty(); /* seems some delay is needed here before remapping DDR memory */\n'
		# self.cfile+='\tddrc_wait_queue_empty(); /* seems some delay is needed here before remapping DDR memory */\n'
		self._cp_led('LED_CHECKPOINT_9') # After relocation to DDR (to 0x4000000+ )
		# self._cp_led('LED_CHECKPOINT_9') # After relocation to DDR (to 0x4000000+ )
		self.cfile+='\twritel(0, &scu_base->filter_start); /* Remap DDR to zero, FILTERSTART */\n'
		@@ -692,7 +692,7 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
		\td= (int *) 0;
		\twhile (d < ((int ) 0x30000)) d++=*s++;

		\tddrc_wait_queue_empty(); /* Wait no commands are pending in DDRC queue */
		/\tddrc_wait_queue_empty();/ /* Wait no commands are pending in DDRC queue */
		/*
		* Below is a hack - copying the same data to low SDRAM again - probably just a delay.
		* Waiting for ddrc_wait_queue_empty() alone is not sufficient - some of the
		@@ -700,11 +700,12 @@ int arch_cpu_init(void)
		* seemingly unrelated changes. With this extra delay all seems fine.
		* Better understanding of the original problem and a fix is needed.
		*/
		/*
		\ts= (int *) 0x4000000;
		\td= (int *) 0;
		\twhile (d < ((int ) 0x30000)) d++=*s++;

		\tddrc_wait_queue_empty(); /* Wait no commands are pending in DDRC queue */
		*/
		/\tddrc_wait_queue_empty();/ /* Wait no commands are pending in DDRC queue */

		/*
		Continue with the original low-level init, Now we have 2 copies of the code again,

Admin message